44
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of timing of surgery in elderly hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We aimed to assess the impact of timing of surgery in elderly patients with acute hip fracture on morbidity and mortality. We systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and trial registries from 01/1997 to 05/2017, as well as reference lists of relevant reviews, archives of orthopaedic conferences, and contacted experts. Eligible studies had to be randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies, including patients 60 years or older with acute hip fracture. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, abstracted data, and critically appraised study quality. We conducted meta-analyses using the generic inverse variance model. We included 28 prospective observational studies reporting data of 31,242 patients. Patients operated on within 48 hours had a 20% lower risk of dying within 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66–0.97). No statistical significant different mortality risk was observed when comparing patients operated on within or after 24 hours (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67–1.01). Adjusted data demonstrated fewer complications (8% vs. 17%) in patients who had early surgery, and increasing risk for pressure ulcers with increased time of delay in another study. Early hip surgery within 48 hours was associated with lower mortality risk and fewer perioperative complications.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

            The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A systematic review of hip fracture incidence and probability of fracture worldwide

              Summary The country-specific risk of hip fracture and the 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture were determined on a worldwide basis from a systematic review of literature. There was a greater than 10-fold variation in hip fracture risk and fracture probability between countries. Introduction The present study aimed to update the available information base available on the heterogeneity in the risk of hip fracture on a worldwide basis. An additional aim was to document variations in major fracture probability as determined from the available FRAX models. Methods Studies on hip fracture risk were identified from 1950 to November 2011 by a Medline OVID search. Evaluable studies in each country were reviewed for quality and representativeness and a study (studies) chosen to represent that country. Age-specific incidence rates were age-standardised to the world population in 2010 in men, women and both sexes combined. The 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture for a specific clinical scenario was computed in those countries for which a FRAX model was available. Results Following quality evaluation, age-standardised rates of hip fracture were available for 63 countries and 45 FRAX models available in 40 countries to determine fracture probability. There was a greater than 10-fold variation in hip fracture risk and fracture probability between countries. Conclusions Worldwide, there are marked variations in hip fracture rates and in the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures. The variation is sufficiently large that these cannot be explained by the often multiple sources of error in the ascertainment of cases or the catchment population. Understanding the reasons for this heterogeneity may lead to global strategies for the prevention of fractures.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                thomas.klestil@donau-uni.ac.at
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                17 September 2018
                17 September 2018
                2018
                : 8
                : 13933
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Danube University Krems, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Department for Health Sciences and Biomedicine, Center for Medical Specialisations, Dr. Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria
                [2 ]LK Baden-Mödling-Hainburg, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Waltersdorferstraße 75, A-2500 Baden, Austria
                [3 ]Danube University Krems, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Department for Health Sciences and Biomedicine, Center for Regenerative Medicine and Orthopedics, Dr. Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria
                [4 ]UK Krems, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mitterweg 10, A-3500 Krems, Austria
                [5 ]Landeskrankenhaus Hall, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Milser Straße 10, A-6060 Hall in Tirol, Austria
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2108 5830, GRID grid.15462.34, Danube University Krems, Department of Evidence-based Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, ; Dr. Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria
                [7 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2108 5830, GRID grid.15462.34, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, ; Dr. Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria
                [8 ]ISNI 0000000100301493, GRID grid.62562.35, RTI International, 3040 Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, ; North Carolina, NC 27790 United States
                Article
                32098
                10.1038/s41598-018-32098-7
                6141544
                30224765
                43b15eaa-30ad-4129-9c26-29671e41f57f
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 20 June 2018
                : 31 August 2018
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article